This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

64/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Prevention and risk

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objective To determine whether baseline hearing loss increases cognitive decline and risk for all-cause dementia in a population of elderly individuals. Study design Longitudinal cohort study. Setting Community-based, outpatient. Patients Men and women aged 65 years or older without dementia at baseline. Intervention(s) All subjects completed the Modified Mini-Mental Status Exam (3MS-R) at baseline and over 3 triennial follow-up visits. Hearing loss (HL) at baseline was based on observation of hearing difficulties during testing or interview. Incident dementia was determined by clinical assessment and expert consensus. Main outcome measure(s) Dementia and 3MS-R score. Results At baseline, 4,463 subjects were without dementia, 836 of whom had HL. Of those with HL, 16.3% developed dementia, compared with 12.1% of those without HL (p Conclusion Elderly individuals with HL have an increased rate of developing dementia and more rapid decline on 3MS-R scores than their nonhearing impaired counterparts. These findings suggest that hearing impairment may be a marker for cognitive dysfunction in adults age 65 years and older.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Gurgel, R. K., Ward, P. D., Schwartz, S., Norton, M. C., Foster, N. L., & Tschanz, J. T. (2014). Relationship of hearing loss and dementia: a prospective, population-based study. Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology. https://doi.org/10.1097/mao.0000000000000313

Vancouver

Gurgel RK, Ward PD, Schwartz S, Norton MC, Foster NL, Tschanz JT. Relationship of hearing loss and dementia: a prospective, population-based study. Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology. 2014. doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000000313. PMID: 24662628.

BibTeX

@article{gurgel2014-24662628,
  author  = {Gurgel, R. K. and Ward, P. D. and Schwartz, S. and Norton, M. C. and Foster, N. L. and Tschanz, J. T.},
  title   = {{Relationship of hearing loss and dementia: a prospective, population-based study}},
  journal = {Otology \& neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology},
  year    = {2014},
  doi     = {10.1097/mao.0000000000000313},
  pmid    = {24662628},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1097/mao.0000000000000313}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 4,463 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record reports “16.3%; 12.1%”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results At baseline, 4,463 subjects were without dementia, 836 of whom had HL.
Of those with HL, 16.3% developed dementia, compared with 12.1% of those without HL (p Conclusion Elderly individuals with HL have an increased rate of developing dementia and more rapid decline on 3MS-R scores than their nonhearing impaired counterparts.
These findings suggest that hearing impairment may be a marker for cognitive dysfunction in adults age 65 years and older.

Why it matters

In 4,463 community-dwelling adults aged 65+ without dementia, the 836 whose examiners noticed hearing difficulty went on to develop dementia more often (16.3% vs 12.1%) and declined faster on a cognitive screening test (3MS-R) over triennial follow-ups. The authors read this as hearing impairment being a possible "marker for cognitive dysfunction", not a proven cause. Hearing was judged by observation rather than a hearing test, and this study did not test whether treating hearing loss changes risk.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants4,463
Effect size16.3%; 12.1%
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 64/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Otology & Neurotology: journal h-index 142 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	7 / 12	A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	3 / 4	4,463 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 369 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	26.4 citations a year over 14 year(s) since 2014
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 11.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	3 / 6	Cited by 17 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 74 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author JoAnn T. Tschanz: h-index 58 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	University of Utah: institution h-index 1,238 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24662628)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	64 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

17 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Prevention and risk from nearby years

Also tagged “biobank”

1,084 studies in the library carry the topic tag “biobank”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,084 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Prevention and risk

See all studies in Prevention and risk →